1. MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND STREET DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
2009 UPDATE
Pre-Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Transportation and Public Works Department

2. PURPOSE
Describe the 2009 update to the Master Thoroughfare Plan (MTP), including 65 proposed amendments.
Describe the 2009 update to the MTP’s Street Development Standards.

3. BACKGROUND Master Thoroughfare Plan Street Development Standards
Purpose:
Identify existing and future roadways
Identify “functional classification” of roadways
Preserve roadway right of way
Official map last updated 2004
Street Development Standards
Guide roadway network decision making and design
Last updated 2002

4. MTP Map Update Incorporate all approved amendments since 2004
Based on staff analysis, 65 amendments proposed
Reclassifications (53). Factors:
Right of way (ROW) constraints
Reflect existing status
Consistency with plans/plats/studies/project submittals
Expected need for additional traffic capacity
Realignments (12). Factors:
Topography and floodplains
Existing and proposed development
Minimize/consolidate rail crossings
Redevelopment – developed parts of the city. ROW standards sometimes not possible due to existing development.
Some reclassifications are really just corrections: Classified as an existing major arterial but on the ground is an existing minor, etc.
Plans: Near Southside Street Standards, urban village plans, corridor studies (Outer Loop), area plans (TMS), projects submitted for funding through NCTCOG, etc.
Lack of need should really be lack of need or showing greater need.

5. 2009 MTP Map Update - Example
Reclassifications - Example
8th Avenue: Rosedale to Pennsylvania
Current Classification: Existing Major Arterial
Proposed Classification: Existing Minor Arterial
Correctly Identify Current Design
ROW Constraints: Eventual Expansion to 4-lane Divided Arterial is Unlikely
Consistency with Council-Adopted Near Southside Development Standards

6. 2009 Street Development Standards Update
Updated Language and Street Cross Section Designs
Focus Change: From Functional Classification/ Vehicle Counts to Mobility of People and Goods
3-Lane Minor Arterial/Major Collector Alternative
Carroll Ave.

7. 2009 Street Development Standards Update
Camp Bowie

8. Exchange Street (Stockyards)

9. Context Solution Design
• Collaborative, interdisciplinary
• Respects & fits physical setting
• Integrates community objectives
• Preserves scenic, aesthetic, historic and environmental resources
• Maintains safety and mobility
• Applies flexibility in design
Use this slide to describe difference between CSS and CSD and clarify that CSS is common term and acronym used nationally.
Berry Street
City of Fort Worth, Transportation and Public Works Department

10. “One Street Design Does Not Fit All Contexts”
Source:

11. 2009 Street Development Standards Update
Improved Street and Pedestrian Connectivity
Connectivity: important for access for school buses, garbage trucks, emergency vehicles. Also: relieve congestion pressure on arterials. Also: improve attractiveness of bicycling and walking as transportation alternative for short trips
Rail crossings: railroad companies require 2 or 3 closures of existing crossings in order to add a new one – finite possibility. New principal arterial crossings should be grade separated; new major arterials considered on a case-by-case basis. New minor arterial crossings, collectors or locals should be limited.
Traffic studies assess the impacts of proposed developments on existing and planned transportation system. Requirements and expectation, preparation and review guidelines, and establishment of mitigation measures.
Multi-modal Arterials: from MAQ Plan – exclusive or shared transit lanes, bike lanes, etc.

12. 2009 Street Development Standards Update
Traffic Calming on Residential Collectors:
Traffic Circles
Curb Extensions (Bulb-outs)
Curved Streets
Grade Separated Railroad/Arterial Crossings
Pedestrian and Bicyclist Accommodations
Updated Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Guidelines
New Multi-modal Arterial Concept
Connectivity: important for access for school buses, garbage trucks, emergency vehicles. Also: relieve congestion pressure on arterials. Also: improve attractiveness of bicycling and walking as transportation alternative for short trips
Rail crossings: railroad companies require 2 or 3 closures of existing crossings in order to add a new one – finite possibility. New principal arterial crossings should be grade separated; new major arterials considered on a case-by-case basis. New minor arterial crossings, collectors or locals should be limited.
Traffic studies assess the impacts of proposed developments on existing and planned transportation system. Requirements and expectation, preparation and review guidelines, and establishment of mitigation measures.
Multi-modal Arterials: from MAQ Plan – exclusive or shared transit lanes, bike lanes, etc.

14. NEXT STEPS
Date Action
July ITC Presentation on Context Sensitive Streets Policy
July/Aug 2008 Individual Councilmember Briefings on MTP
August Public Meetings
Nov City Plan Commission Public Hearing &
Recommendation
Today Pre-Council Briefing
March 10th City Council Public Hearing & Approval
April Publish New Map & Standards
Documents

15. QUESTIONS?